bjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 2776 posts, RR: 2 Posted (6 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 3349 times:
The two CIA operatives who came to help with the fight at the Benghazi consulate where told to stand down 3 times ignoring the order the 3rd time and went to the fight. Also reports of two drones and a A130U gunship watching the whole attack live.
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16814 posts, RR: 57 Reply 1, posted (6 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 3350 times:
Quoting bjorn14 (Thread starter): The two CIA operatives who came to help with the fight at the Benghazi consulate where told to stand down 3 times ignoring the order the 3rd time and went to the fight. Also reports of two drones and a A130U gunship watching the whole attack live.
Venus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1409 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (6 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 3332 times:
Risk adversion, it has been going on for awhile now, Commanders afraid to release weapons that could boomerang on from the militaries JAG corp on bringing them up on charges. Also the State dept is full of non risk taking careerists who never stick their own neck out for the fear of it getting chopped off.
Why is it every time a Fox News story appears people want another source? I don't see people asking for the obviously leftwing biased MSM for additional sources. The MSM probably won't cover this because it exposes the guy in the White House as incompetent or a traitor. So much for Leon Panetta's claim they had no intelligence.
[Edited 2012-10-26 13:16:50]
"An idea has to be incredibly absurd to have any reasonable chance of succeeding" --A. Einstein
casinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3251 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (6 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 3324 times:
Quoting bjorn14 (Thread starter): So who and why would give the order to stand down and let the ambassador get killed?
Not sure what you are trying to imply here, but at that point, it would be the CIA chain of command.
Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 2): Risk adversion, it has been going on for awhile now, Commanders afraid to release weapons that could boomerang on from the militaries JAG corp on bringing them up on charges. Also the State dept is full of non risk taking careerists who never stick their own neck out for the fear of it getting chopped off.
Problem here was that it was not an active war zone, and the Libyan Government was supposed to be providing security. There are a lot of ramifications for violating a countries soveriegnty. Especially if you don't know what was going on.
Hindsight and monday morning quarterbacking make this look like a fiasco, but at the time , no one knew what was going on.
Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
windy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2554 posts, RR: 5 Reply 10, posted (6 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 3284 times:
Quoting casinterest (Reply 4): Quoting bjorn14 (Thread starter):So who and why would give the order to stand down and let the ambassador get killed?
Not sure what you are trying to imply here, but at that point, it would be the CIA chain of command.
And the CIA reports to who? When an attack is going on do youu think the CIA just sits on it and does nothing. There was flash traffic worldwide when this happened. The Pentagon, State and the White house new what was happening. This did not happen in a CIA vacuum.
Quoting casinterest (Reply 6):
Because going around shooting if you aren't sure who to shoot is a poor idea? Or that two CIA agents maybe aren't the best option for fighting off a mob and may be more useful waiting and watching
Sorry but CIA had special forces on the ground near the compound. They heard the fighting and could not wait any longer and went to the sound of gunfire and died while Obama went to bed. This is turning ointo one of the most disgusting disasters that I have seen in my lifetime.
Quoting casinterest (Reply 6): This is why we need somehting other than fox news. it turns people into irrational fools.
This what they say when they have no answer. Blame the source
Quoting casinterest (Reply 4): Problem here was that it was not an active war zone, and the Libyan Government was supposed to be providing security. There are a lot of ramifications for violating a countries soveriegnty.
You have to be kidding right? Not a war zone? Violating a countries soverignty? Makes me want to puke to hear this coming out of the left's mouth today.
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 5297 posts, RR: 47 Reply 13, posted (6 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 3267 times:
I'm sure if we showed more force there'd be multiple incidents where we blast away civilians. No one in the US wanted these 4 Americans killed, but we know nothing about this story. Were they trying to engage a few people that were obviously trying to kill the ambassador or were they looking at permission to fire away at a crowd killing innocent people? (Sure some in the crowd were guilty, but you can't assume everyone at that protest was out for blood.)
This Libya thing is out of control, absolutely. I usually jump on people that accuse one side (blanketing a whole group of people rather that a few individuals) but there are so many on the right shooting at the hip, taking every tiny detail in this incident and automatically sending out a mob for the President's head. It's getting ridiculous.
The President isn't Jesus and he is not going to chose the 100% right course of action 100% of the time. Yes there are many factors that could have been handled better, but yall are jumping on him like so many jump off a police officer when he has to use force... there are so many things going on, so many unknowns, you have to escalate force just enough or you kill innocent people and are screwed, and if you don't react quickly enough people will die as well.
Throw any other person in the President's place and I bet you 90% would have handled it the same way... maybe they wouldn't have a whole group that is looking to crucify them at every wrong move.
Pu From Sweden, joined Dec 2011, 642 posts, RR: 12 Reply 17, posted (6 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 3244 times:
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 3): Why is it every time a Fox News story appears people want another source?
Because Fox has become in the weeks leading up to the election nothing more than a mouthpiece of the Republican Party. Zero balance whatsoever, all neutral or pro-Obama news stories are not covered. In fact most non-political stories are ignored unless they can make the Obama administration look bad.
Todays big GDP news is not even mentioned on Foxnews.com! (hmmmm, can't imagine why....)
Every day for the last couple weeks foxnews.com has run a big-scary-headline and an unflattering Obama picture as their main headline, and has instigated a permanent feature on covering not the news, but other news services, which they label "Bias Alert".
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 8): CNN, MSNBC, WaPo, NYT are such fine journalistic organs.
Do you ever read them?
I goto Fox, CNN, the BBC wlmost every day. CNN makes a conscious effort to print an equal number of good and bad stories on both candidates, and even more revealing covers stories like the hurricane, the Italian PM who is going to jail, and recent positive US economic news (GDP revised up to 2% growth from 1.3%). Meanwhile, a murder in Libya weeks ago is held by Fox to be the most important story for more than a month!
Pu From Sweden, joined Dec 2011, 642 posts, RR: 12 Reply 20, posted (6 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3185 times:
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 19): BTW, if Fox is so BS why do you even waste your time going there?
To understand people
....who only goto Fox
....who get emotional satisfaction from being made angry
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 19): So I suppose you don't care if someone lies about how you died or worse did nothing to stop it
I don't care much about a murder in an emerging pro-American democracy that is nevertheless not in total control of fringe anti-American elements. 1000s of Americans die of unnatural causes overseas every year, some by foul play. Regrettable, but not high on the list of America's problems.
Nearly 2000 Americans have died on the streets of America at the hands of other Americans since the Benghazi matter that is so important to the Right: to many of us America's problems are primarily at home and NOT the fault of the Muslim world...but, we get it, the "foreign threat," especially Islamic, is a big deal to Republicans. Less so for others.
FlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6049 posts, RR: 25 Reply 21, posted (6 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3180 times:
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 19): So I suppose you don't care if someone lies about how you died or worse did nothing to stop it.
Where was all the outrage from conservatives when Bush sent thousands of troops into Iraq to die without proper training or equipment to deal with insurgent forces...a war based on intelligence that everyone knew was faulty.
I'm not saying the handling of Benghazi was done well, but conservative outrage over it is a joke.
Ahahaha, how quickly fortunes change in the world of political diehards!
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 3): Why is it every time a Fox News story appears people want another source?
Because the people who post stories from it have a reputation, earned or not, for following it up with stuff like this:
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 3): I don't see people asking for the obviously leftwing biased MSM for additional sources. The MSM probably won't cover this because it exposes the guy in the White House as incompetent or a traitor. So much for Leon Panetta's claim they had no intelligence.
I think that on balance, people who obliquely accuse the President of the United States of conspiracy and treason are more likely to twist established facts and take things out of context, than other people who are not making such accusations. At least, be aware of the company you keep when you're saying such things.
In all seriousness, the Benghazi tragedy has become yet another manufactured-outrage story that sells big when few other things are happening. So maybe there was a confused initial response, so maybe the first few statements released didn't exactly reflect what actually took place. What are we supposed to make of that? Very few catastrophes come with instructions for what to do as and after they occur, and frankly the public has forgiven much larger oversights and failures in the past.
25 seb146: All the time people ask. No one on the right trusts HufPo, WaPo, MSNBC just like no one on the left trusts FOX or CBS. I notice the "balanced" news s
26 fr8mech: Remember when the National Enquirer was the only one reporting on the John Edward's love child? Remember when it was only CBS News reporting on Fast a
27 Newark727: Because people are reporting that they actually did give that order? And your point is what exactly? It didn't happen under a Republican president; t
28 Mir: Because they had a UN Security Council resolution asking them to do it. Why is the difference so hard to understand? -Mir
29 fr8mech: Why didn't the statement read: "No such order was given to our people"? Why is the statement crafted to remove the CIA from the loop? As time goes on
30 Ken777: His job is to talk to the President, not journalists. And The Sun? At least it has the Page 3 Girls. Maybe because they were given the green light to
31 jakeorion: Say what you want about everything else, but I believe this should be the key point. The fact the administration lied about it and nobody cares.
32 Mir: Indeed. And until it does, perhaps we should refrain from drawing conclusions based on heat-of-the-moment statements, emails, phone calls, etc. which
33 fr8mech: Really. You missed the whole intelligence briefing thing? What did Bush know and when did he know it? Come on. When the media shook off their new fou
34 BMI727: Basically the complaints of people seem to come down to the fact that apparently we didn't shoot enough Muslims or something like that.
35 DeltaMD90: What is the lie? Being vague and not shooting from the hip? I'm not in politics, but I can definitely see why you need to be vague sometimes. Correct
36 casinterest: I wouldn't trust you with a beer run , never mind my own rescue. You'd probably just tell the 130 to open fire without having a clue who is in the bu
37 Mir: Sit down and wait for the investigation to be over, yes. Like the people who actually know how the intelligence game works (like Condi Rice) have sug
38 Darksnowynight: What are you, twelve? If this is the worst thing you've ever seen, all I can ask is in what universe, where? Yeahup, we generally like to respect oth
39 Pu: They are a force at least as influential on US politics as TV itself. . . . A lot of this is less of a deliberate bias in the "left wing media," and
40 EA CO AS: Perhaps you overlooked the fact that the Daily Mail story cited CBS News as the source. Or is CBS News suddenly a conservative mouthpiece as well?
41 seb146: The Democratic chair of the intelligence committee did not launch full-scale investigations into how 9/11 could have been prevented, did he? The Demo
42 fr8mech: How many budgets have passed out of the House and not been taken up by the Senate? I know of one or two. Would have been an empty hole or would have
43 bjorn14: Also the President of Libya warned the US of an imminent attack 2 days before the bloodshed happened so it would be just a big of an embarrasment for
44 Darksnowynight: But that's not actually true. Since the 2nd debate, that's actually been debunked a few times now. They were indeed a bit hesitant to call it a speci
45 scbriml: Are they getting riled up because there's an agenda? No, that couldn't possibly be the reason, could it?
46 Darksnowynight: Yup. As many have said, if the show were not on the left foot, things would be very different indeed. Does anyone even remember the Hadditha Massacre
47 BN747: I'm guessing no one on this board has been in a 'Embassy under siege' event...so at lot of this 'we shoulda' .. we coulda, he knew this, they knew tha
48 Pu: That is a big stretch of the definition of terrorism. You act like the administration is hiding something that, if known (as it is known by specially
49 n318ea: It is ironic that President Obama & Company could tell what underwear the Seal Team 6 members where wearing in real time when Bin Laden was killed
50 Pu: Why is that? Haven't you already decided to vote for Romney?
51 D L X: And until then, conspiracy theorists will only accept as true what they want to be the truth. If their truth does not materialize today, they'll simp
52 mham001: That fact only disproves your whining about "sovereignty" and a totally irrelevant analogy about the Chinese in Washington.
53 seb146: Except he did call it a terrorist attack. Not in the way the right-wing wants him to call it a terrorist attack, but he called it a terrorist attack.
54 scbriml: Wait, you seriously think Fox news is too liberal?
55 Ken777: Didn't realize that you had direct links to the CIA and White House. Check another thread and you'll find that racism isn't anything new. It's been a
56 DeltaMD90: Yeah, so basically facts were murky in the beginning and they weren't sure the extent of Al-Qaeda's connection in the event so they didn't jump to co
57 Newark727: So far no one has yet demonstrated any "lie" that couldn't just be attempting to parse the sequence of events as more facts became known. Or if they h
58 DeltaMD90: That's another good point, do you know how well an AC-130 gunship would stop individuals from killing the ambassador? Extremely well! Except it would
59 bjorn14: Yep. Here's the interview reported by ABC from a local NBC affiliate. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...azi-were-denied-requests-for-help/ I hav
60 Newark727: You see, this is the thing. I'm not personally familiar with the precision capabilities of the AC-130 or the Predator or whatever else is alleged to
61 bjorn14: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/ac-130u.htm This a/c would have been about 1h 20m from its base in Sicily. The fight lasted 7
62 Pu: Why does imagined humiliation bring such fury to the right? (I love this cop-speak miliatry fans use. Using the acronym POTUS = 90% chance you're Rep
63 DeltaMD90: Do you know the armament of the AC-130!? Yeah try using an AC-130 to hit a select few people and miss everyone else. Actually lots of protests in the
64 n318ea: Who I vote for has nothing to do that the POTUS may have lied to the Country. See first answer.
65 D L X: Wait, so your friend who is amazingly an ex-SEAL, knows everything, and spills all this stuff to you, allows it to be posted on the internet, and the
66 Mir: Because there's a difference between keeping track of a the events and people involved in a mission that you priginate and control and keeping track
67 bjorn14: I was in Tunisia when the Arab Spring began and got caught in several protests and I saw no firearms carried by protestors. Only the police had them.
68 Pu: 1. What reports, please. 2. Even if he went to bed, this is important why? Guilty until proven innocent, eh? You don't like Obama, we get it, but kee
69 Newark727: If he's a former officer, I don't see how he could possibly know this. The attack was coincident with wider developments regarding an offensive video
70 DeltaMD90: And Tunisia is not the only Middle Eastern county. Weapons are very common over there. Regardless, what do you think the President should have done?
71 seb146: I found the last paragraph of the story interesting: "CIA spokesperson Jennifer Youngblood said, “We can say with confidence that the Agency reacte
72 Stabilator: A little information on the C130U gunship: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/ac-130u.htm I'm not sure why some of you seem to th
73 DeltaMD90: Maybe not destroying the entire country, but ONLY killing a few terrorists rushing inside of a embassy? Plaese explain to me how an AC-130 would be e
74 EA CO AS: Because Ambassador Chris Stevens is dead. Killed by terrorists in a a premeditated attack. The Obama Administration had steadfastly denied that it wa
75 D L X: At the very least, flying an AC-130 in to take out the protesters would appear completely and utterly barbaric if successful. Branch Davidian style.
76 seb146: Except the following two days when he did call it a terrorist attack. But, to you on the right "Act of Terror" is not even close to "terrorist act" a
77 Pu: Along with ~2000 other Americans murdered since then. Why is his death so important to you? Why is this so importanat to you? A few people killed tho
78 EA CO AS: You're joking, right? Why is it seemingly unimportant to you? Clearly, you don't.
79 EA CO AS: Then afterwards, why did he trot out UN Ambassador Rice to FIVE morning talk shows to specifically claim it WASN'T an act of terrorism, but a spontan
80 Newark727: Because some people have their own set of priorities about what events are worth making political judgments about? I'm not going to say anything abou
81 Newark727: Maybe first you can establish why the semantics of who called it terrorism when are actually important? I always figured on "act of terror" and an ef
82 Pu: Not at all. An ambassador died. No one would be talking aout it except that Fox has made it their headline for a month straight. American People die
83 DeltaMD90: He means that instead of focusing so much on this issue we could be working on cleaning up the streets. He's got a point, though I can see the outrag
84 Newark727: I agree that it should be investigated, but people seem to be focusing on the wrong things in calling for it, mostly the narrative building Al Qaeda a
85 Pu: Why is it so incredibly important to you that one person calls it terrorism and another doesn't? Does this in any way change the FACTS of what happen
86 Pu: All Europeans are communist subversives who root for the terrorists and have no appreciation for America's role as global defender of freedom, but I
87 Flighty: Bingo. Hahaha. Hopefully they'll have some additional thoughts after what happened?
88 EA CO AS: And it's disgraceful that only Fox is talking about it. How would it affect your country if your Ambassador to the United States were gunned down by
89 D L X: Why in that long response did you not answer this question: That seems like an extremely important point, and a good answer to that question would go
90 DeltaMD90: Al Qaeda IS weaker. Most of their chain of command is dead or captured; they went from causing 9/11, bombing subways and trains in Europe, attempting
91 Pu: I would think its part of the normal climate of gun murders in the USA and not particularly significant. About 3000 American civilians have been kill
92 seb146: Actually, no. The left is talking about it to in the sense that they are trying to figure out why FOX is making that big of a deal over it. Again: th
93 bjorn14: And you still believe that lie? Parse----they just ignored it. ...and there are reports that security was intentionally drawn down 2 weeks before the
94 D L X: Why do some people insist on believing Fox News to the exclusion of literally *everyone* else? Why do you believe them when you already know they are
95 Pu: What a fantastic illustration of Right v. Left thinking and priorities...... Mali ! . . . Challenging the US president's claim that the "al-Qaeda thr
96 DeltaMD90: Um yeah, the video was used as a justification. The attacks most likely would've happened without the video. Just like when terrorists kidnap an Amer
97 Newark727: The attacks happened at the same time protests began breaking out all over the Muslim world, mostly regarding the video. I'm not implying causation,
98 D L X: Exactly. At the very minimum, it provided excellent cover for the attack.
99 bjorn14: Because Obama doesn't want to use it to describe the jihadists in the BEN attack. If he did Americans would assume he failed in his duties. America c
100 DeltaMD90: Isn't "act of terror" close enough to "terrorism?" I swear, this President can do no right to some people Too bad we can't follow their footsteps...
101 Newark727: There was reason to be worried before that, I think the Egyptian embassy actually had a statement about the video before the attacks took place which
102 D L X: This is demonstrably false. Here's a timeline. Notice the protests on September 11, 2012 were not limited to Libya. http://www.slate.com/articles/new
103 Pu: Is THIS what the nutbags like Brietbart are saying? Well, thanks for finally explaining why there's such a big hang up about using the word "terroris
104 D L X: Actually, no. You'll notice that when big news breaks (especially if it is potentially damning to a Republican), Fox News does not report it until th
105 bjorn14: Another source than this leftwing nutjob site?
106 casinterest: Take what you get. Your whole thread started from Fake news. Without waiting for the official investigation. The attack was over by 8:30 Eastern. htt